Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[DarwinX]

Hi Made U Think,

Now we may be getting somewhere. Hope springs eternal etc.

Gravity, THE RESULT OF SPACE IN MATTER. And Maybe not

I am looking for a reason for gravity as the result of something else. The something else should be understandable and reliable. I am in good company. M.

Note - Half the universe exists at or above the fractal atom unit and the other half of the universe exists below the atom fractal unit. The invisible movement we call 'gravity' exists in the fractal universe which exists below the atomic level. This is why we can feel it but we can't effect it or interact with it. Note - Gravity is a pushing motion, not a pulling force. Are you sure you are in good company? Or are you just surrounded by establishment lackeys and associated sycophants?

[Obvious Leo]

I would advise anybody with an interest in physics to ignore this post, bit I guess this is unnecessary.

Regards Leo

[DarwinX]

I am not a physicist, but aether? Wasn't that disregarded over 100 years ago with the results of the Michelson-Morley experiment?

It was only Einstein who disregarded the Aether theory because it didn't match his newly hatched theories. In order to protect his new theories he had to disregard some old theories. Dalton Miller's experiments were more accurate and showed the aether to exist. This is what Einstein disregarded. He saw Dayton Miller as a threat to his power and authority so he had his results tampered with by his associates. On the other hand, he had his own experiments souped-up so that they would be more acceptable. His famous measurements of star light behind the sun are all just measurements of the diffraction of light and have nothing to do with the distortion of space time. Forward 100 years - The gravity B probe. This experiment is so ridiculous it defies belief. How can 4 spinning gyroscopes which wobble uncontrollably when put into outer space constitute a scientific measurement of the twisting effect of space time? It was just a big multi-million dollar mistake and a pat-yourself-on-the-back science hug fest.

Aren't the very constituents that make up "empty space" regarded as a fabric? If space time cannot be curved and distorted by gravity, then what is a black hole? How was there physical proof to Einstein'sTOR by measuring the light arc of a star behind the sun? Even me, a "lay man" knows that gravity doesn't pull, it "pushes." The reason we are able to remain on this planet without flying off at 1000 mph is not because of the earths mass "pulling" us toward it, but the earths mass curves the "fabric" of space around it, so we are"pushed" toward earth, in the same way that a bowling ball placed in the center of a trampoline will make a "dimple." Try to roll a baseball straight and it won't be "pulled" around the bowling ball, it will be "forced" to "ride along" the curved "fabric" of the trampoline. I'm sure you are already well aware of this analogy but how can you dispute that gravity isn't a force? If it wasn't we would already have a unified field theory of everything! Maybe we don't because "physicists"won't regard it as a(although very weak compared to the others, but nonetheless)fundamental force of this universe! Lol just kidding. If you can step off of your rooftop, and not be succumbed by the force of gravity, then I will tip my hat to you good sir and take your word for it. Until then, I will continue to believe in Einsteins(the name the whole world associates with genius) idea of the "curved"spacetime.

The aether pushes us down towards the earth's centre. That's gravity. If space is a fabric then why does it always fold down? Why doesn't it fold up and push us away instead? The unified theory has already been worked out. The science community refuses to recognize it because it doesn't match their preconceived ideas and theories. In order to accept a unified field theory they must first accept 1. Aether theory 2. Gravity pushes. 3. Light is a wave and not a particle. 4 Electricty, gravity and magnetism are all forms of aether flux. 5. Expanding Earth theory

[Gulnara]

Gravity is only an illusion. It is simply an attempt of an object to go into its own orbit that causes object to slam against the ground. Imagine atmosphere as a jell or thick fluid, it does move along Earth's surface by inertia of the spin, the density also affects how objects fall to Earth, carried along the Earth's spin by the density of atmosphere. The object falls not far from the place it was dropped from, even though in 1 second Earth spins miles around it's exist and moves along it's orbit for miles.

The fact of Earth being created by a cosmic matter of certain characteristics ( the kind that would have a size, density and a spin beneficial for entanglement with other chunks of matter to eventually form planet) makes presence of such matter on Earth the inherited quality. This inherited quality of Earthly matter causes one to fall for an illusion of gravity. Somehow dark matter particles avoid being caught into gravitational field! For that reason they did not form the body of the planets.

[Obvious Leo]

It was a science conversation for a little while at least. I wondered how long it would last.

[Felix]

"I wondered how long it would last."

Now you know... But Jesus loves you, Leo, that's the important thing.

[Obvious Leo]

"I wondered how long it would last."

Now you know... But Jesus loves you, Leo, that's the important thing.

I have no beef with Jesus, Felix, and see no contradiction in calling myself a Christian atheist. I was raised in a Christian family within a broader Christian culture and I was Indoctrinated into Christian values from Infancy. I'm glad of it and have always tried to live my life according to these basic humanist principles. I've yet to meet an atheist that chucked out the baby with the bathwater. Incidentally I'm also happy enough to call myself a Buddhist atheist, since belief in the supernatural is not required in Buddhism, or any belief for that matter. Thus I can also call myself a Christian Buddhist. As far as I'm concerned if there were more of us around the world would be a safer place.

Regards Leo

[Felix]

Ah! I figured you'd realize I was joking, Leo, but thank you for relating your background, it provides me a better understanding of your point of view.

[Obvious Leo]

There are many things about homo sapiens that I am yet to understand, Felix, but the one that I'll never get to understand is how a person who bears only peace and goodwill to all of humanity could be regarded as a sinner. The pope doesn't seem to think so and is very welcoming of non-believing Christians to the brotherhood of man, as well as those who find their spiritual fulfillment in other traditions. I see this as progress towards a more enlightened social contract and not a backslide into anarchy, as many fundamentalists of all persuasions seem to fear.

Regards Leo

DarwinX. You've given me a good idea. I've written on the subject of gravity from many different angles but never from the one that you suggest. The notion of gravity as a conspiracy theory is one rich in comedic potential and I'm laying out the framework as we speak. I love writing farce as a recreation but I also have ulterior motives. I seem to find them the easiest style of essay to sell to magazines and journals and I need to make a living like the rest of us. I'm working up a cast of characters and a plot at the moment and am open to suggestions. I think I'll start with Galileo dropping his balls off the leaning tower of Pisa, although historically this never happened. By all accounts he died with both his nuts, although it was a close run thing. I'll find plenty of good stuff to put in the middle and then I'll end it with Galileo again before the Holy Roman Inquisition singing a homage to Newton in falsetto, while Einstein looks on puffing his pipe with a worried frown. I reckon it could work.

[Mechsmith]

Leo, regarding your post #90,

We agree perfectly more or less

I don't think that the speed of light is directly related to the speed of time. It may be related to the accelerations provided by gravity. Simply speaking change can occur without light. It may not be able to change without gravity. But, mechanically speaking, sufficient gravity probably either stops change or moves matter into the realm of QM.

If gravity is caused simply by sub atomic, atomic or molecular motion then at the point of stoppage change would stop and then time and gravity would stop. OOp's i just walked onto a repeating "singularity" but nothing happened

I am not thinkig clearly tonight. Good luck with your book. M.

[Obvious Leo]

If gravity is caused simply by sub atomic, atomic or molecular motion

I rather look at it the opposite way around, in that gravity is the causer, rather than the causee, since I model gravity as a simple non-linear function of time. Although the distinction is somewhat arbitrary, I find it easier to think through it in this way. In a sense it's rather like asking does gravity determine the duration of the quantum moment or does the duration of the quantum moment determine the strength of the gravitational field. Since time and gravity are quantised equivalently in this paradigm it doesn't make a scrap of difference. However for my own conceptual convenience I still prefer to think of it as gravity determining time. It's truly neither here nor there.

Good luck with your book. M.

Thank you for your kind thoughts, M. The book is finished and has been for some time. The editing is very difficult because I'm just a humble essayist who scatters his stuff all over the place. The editing is what I've been doing for the past 6 months and one of the reasons why I'm here. Physics is not for the faint-hearted and I just need to get a few things straight with my language of expression, which is difficult without feedback. What makes perfect sense to me may be Zwahili to somebody else. It would help if I could restrain myself and simply ignore arrant nonsense but sadly that's not the way I'm made. I don't include you in that observation, by the way.

Regards Leo

[Trey]

This may have already been covered but: Astronomical measurements of pulsars have confirmed to great precision that gravity propagates at the speed of light.

[Mechsmith]

Trey,

I haven't attempted to work that out completely yet but generally I find that if something moves at the speed of light it may simply be because the speed of light places serious restrictions on what we can see.

We may find that gravity only propagates at the speed of light because light is the only way we can observe whatever we are attempting to. If anything goes faster than light we couldnt see it anyways.

There are reputed to be gravitationally bound structures in the Universe that are larger than they could be if gravity only propagated at "c" from the moment of the Big Bang.

These would seem to require a BB-Expanding Universe scenario or a pre-existing field. A pre-existing field requires a pre-existing universe. A big bang could not happen within said pre-existing universe. At least not within currently popular assumptions.

"If your only tool is a hammer everything looks like a nail" If your only tool is light we think everything is visible.

Happy Thoughts, M

-- Updated August 13th, 2014, 6:43 pm to add the following --

I just bumped into this. Hope we can all find it interesting.

http://www.nasa.gov/nustar